Intervest Enterprises, Inc. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
The fact that a corporation which joined in the filing of a consolidated return was found not to be a proper party to that return did not deprive this Court of jurisdiction in respect of a petition filed by such corporation in response to a notice from respondent asserting a deficiency against it.
1Opinion of the Court
SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION
Tannenwald, Judge:
A question has arisen, in connection with the entry of decision under Rule 50, as to the proper disposition to be made in respect of petitioner Little Theatre, Inc.
The deficiency notice herein was mailed to Intervest Enterprises, Inc. It reads in pertinent part as follows:
Inter vest Enterprises, Inc.
c/o Sidney Farber
16 Court Street
Brooklyn, New York 11201
Gentlemen :
In accordance with the provisions of existing internal revenue laws, notice is given that the determination of your income tax liability and that of your affiliated…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Wheeler's Peachtree Pharmacy, Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1960
- Hannan v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1969
- Brzezinski v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1954
- National Committee to Secure Justice, etc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1957
- Estate of Goodall v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1968
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Naftel v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1985
- Peninsula Steel Products & Equipment Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1982
- Alumax Inc. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1997
- Southern Pacific Co. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1985
- Ben D. And Patricia D. Stevens v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.